Paper detail

Critical Benchmarking of the G4(MP2) Model, the Correlation Consistent Composite Approach and Popular Density Functional Approximations on a Probabilistically Pruned Benchmark Dataset of Formation Enthalpies

First-principles calculation of the standard formation enthalpy, $ΔH_f^\circ$ (298K), in such large scale as required by chemical space explorations, is amenable only with density functional approximations (DFAs) and some composite wave function theories (cWFTs). Alas, the accuracies of popular range-separated hybrid, `rung-4' DFAs, and cWFTs that offer the best accuracy-vs.-cost trade-off have as yet been established only for datasets predominantly comprising small molecules, hence, their transferability to larger datasets remains vague. In this study, we present an extended benchmark dataset of over 1600 values of $ΔH_f^\circ$ for structurally and electronically diverse molecules. We apply quartile-ranking based on boundary-corrected kernel density estimation to filter outliers and arrive at Probabilistically Pruned Enthalpies of 1694 compounds (PPE1694). For this dataset, we rank the prediction accuracies of G4, G4(MP2), ccCA, CBS-QB3 and 23 popular DFAs using conventional and probabilistic error metrics. We discuss systematic prediction errors and highlight the role an empirical higher-level correction (HLC) plays in the G4(MP2) model. Furthermore, we comment on uncertainties associated with the reference empirical data for atoms and the systematic errors stemming from these that grow with the molecular size. We believe these findings to aid in identifying meaningful application domains for quantum thermochemical methods.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.